ArticleBMC cancer2024
Validation of two predictive models for survival in anaplastic thyroid cancer (ATC).
Article in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The efficacy of various treatment modalities and their combinations in improving survival outcomes for anaplastic thyroid cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Stereotactic Radiotherapy for Metastatic Anaplastic Thyroid Cancer: A Single-center Experience and Systematic Review.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prognosis of patients with anaplastic thyroid cancer (ATC) remains dismal. A small portion of patients experience longterm survival and need to be identified before treatment allocation. Survival scores may guide clinicians making more informed decisions about treatment options and improve the understanding of patients' prognosis. The aim of this study was to validate two prognostic scores using an independent dataset to analyze which prognostic index is superior in discriminating survival.
methodsThirty-four patients with histologically confirmed ATC diagnosed between January 2009 and December 2019 were consecutively treated at our department and evaluated. Next generation sequencing was performed in 7 (21%) patients, but no druggable mutation was found. 50% of all patients received surgery and 56% were treated with chemoradiotherapy. The median radiation dose in equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions (EQD2) was 50 Gy (SD:21 Gy). The study compared the discrimination of the Sugitani Prognostic Index (SPI) and the Marchand-Crety Prognostic Score (MCPS) using concordance statistics, area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve (AUC), net reclassification index, and integrated discrimination improvement for 6-month survival.
resultsThe median survival of the entire cohort was 5 months (range: 1-133). The AUC for 6-month survival was 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI]:0.72-0.97) for SPI and 0.69 (95% CI: 0.56-0.83) for MCPS (p < 0.0001). Using the net reclassification index (NRI), 73% of patients were correctly reclassified using SPI instead of MCPS for 6-month survival (p = 0.0237).
conclusionThe SPI was more accurate than the MCPS to determine patients' life expectancies and should be recommended for clinical guidance and treatment allocation. In the last decade, comprehensive genetic profiling of actionable mutations in ATC has become vital to guide targeted therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.